The finite element method (FEM) is a numerical technique used to perform

finite element analysis (FEA) of any given physical phenomenon.

It is necessary to use mathematics to comprehensively understand and
quantify any physical phenomena, such as structural or fluid behavior, thermal
transport, wave propagation, and the growth of biological cells. Most of these
processes are described using partial differential equations (PDEs). However,
for a computer to solve these PDEs, numerical techniques have been
developed over the last few decades and one of the most prominent today is
the finite element method.

FINITE ELEMENT METHOD Applications of the Finite

Element Method
Finite element analysis of an aircraft’s bearing bracket carried out in the web
browser with SimScale
The finite element method started with significant promise in the modeling of
several mechanical applications related to aerospace and civil engineering.
The applications of the finite element method are only now starting to reach
their potential. One of the most exciting prospects is its application in coupled
problems such as fluid-structure interaction, thermomechanical,
thermochemical, thermo-chemo-mechanical problems, biomechanics,
biomedical engineering, piezoelectric, ferroelectric, and electromagnetics.

There have been many alternative methods proposed in recent decades, but
their commercial applicability is yet to be proved. In short, FEM has just made
a blip on the radar!

Before starting with the differential equations, it is essential to read the article
about FEA in the SimWiki. It begins with the basics and gradually progresses
to the differential equations.

FEA In The

FEM EQUATIONS Partial Differential Equations

Firstly, it is important to understand the different genre of PDEs and their
suitability for use with FEM. Understanding this is particularly important to
everyone, irrespective of the motivation for using finite element analysis. It is
critical to remember that FEM is a tool and any tool is only as good as its user.
Fig. 01: Laplace equation on an annulus. Image by Fourthirtytwo [CC BY-SA 3.0
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons.

PDEs can be categorized as elliptic, hyperbolic, and parabolic. When solving

these differential equations, boundary and/or initial conditions need to be
provided. Based on the type of PDE, the necessary inputs can be evaluated.
Examples for PDEs in each category include the Poisson equation (elliptic),
Wave equation (hyperbolic), and Fourier law (parabolic).

There are two main approaches to solving elliptic PDEs, namely the finite
difference methods (FDM) and variational (or energy) methods. FEM falls into
the second category. Variational approaches are primarily based on the
philosophy of energy minimization.

Hyperbolic PDEs are commonly associated with jumps in solutions. For

example, the wave equation is a hyperbolic PDE. Owing to the existence of
discontinuities (or jumps) in solutions, the original FEM technology (or
Bubnov-Galerkin Method) was believed to be unsuitable for solving hyperbolic
PDEs. However, over the years, modifications have been developed to extend
the applicability of FEM technology.

Before concluding this discussion, it is necessary to consider the

consequence of using a numerical framework that is unsuitable for the type of
PDE. Such usage leads to solutions that are known as “improperly posed.”
This could mean that small changes in the domain parameters lead to large
oscillations in the solutions, or that the solutions exist only in a certain part of
the domain or time, which are not reliable. Well-posed explications are defined
as those where a unique solution exists continuously for the defined data.
Hence, considering reliability, it is extremely important to obtain well-posed
solutions.

Download our ‘Tips for Architecture, Engineering & Construction (AEC)’ white
paper to learn how to optimize your designs!
Download Now

FEM Principle of Energy Minimization

How does FEM work? What is the primary driving force? The principle of
minimization of energy forms the primary backbone of the finite element
method. In other words, when a particular boundary condition is applied to a
body, this can lead to several configurations but yet only one particular
configuration is realistically possible or achieved. Even when the simulation is
performed multiple times, same results prevail. Why is this so?
 Fig. 02: Depiction of the
principle of virtual work

This is governed by the principle of minimization of energy. It states that when

a boundary condition (like displacement or force) is applied, of the numerous
possible configurations that the body can take, only that configuration where
the total energy is minimum is the one that is chosen.

FINITE ELEMENT METHOD History of the Finite Element

Method
Technically, depending on one’s perspective, FEM can be said to have had its
origins in the work of Euler, as early as in the 16th century. However, the
earliest mathematical papers on FEM can be found in the works of Schellback
[1851] and Courant [1943].

FEM was independently developed by engineers to address structural

mechanics problems related to aerospace and civil engineering. The
developments began in the mid-1950s with the papers of Turner, Clough,
Martin, and Topp [1956], Argyris [1957], and Babuska and Aziz [1972]. The
books by Zienkiewicz [1971] and Strang, and Fix [1973] also laid the
foundations for future development in FEM.

An interesting review of these historical developments can be found in Oden

[1991]. A review of the FEM development over the last 75 years can be found
in this blog article: 75 Years of the Finite Element Method.
Attend The Free FEA Master Class

TECHNICAL FEM Technical Overview of Finite Element

Method
Finite element method is in itself a semester course. In this article, a concise
description of the mechanism of FEM is described. Consider a simple 1-D
problem to depict the various stages involved in FEA.

Weak Form
One of the first steps in FEM is to identify the PDE associated with the
physical phenomenon. The PDE (or differential form) is known as the strong
form and the integral form is known as the weak form. Consider the simple
PDE as shown below. The equation is multiplied by a trial function v(x) on
both sides and integrated with the domain [0,1].

Now, using integration of parts, the LHS of the above equation can be
reduced to
As it can be seen, the order of continuity required for the unknown function
u(x) is reduced by one. The earlier differential equation required u(x) to be
differentiable at least twice while the integral equation requires it to be
differentiable only once. The same is true for multi-dimensional functions, but
the derivatives are replaced by gradients and divergence.

Without going into the mathematics, the Riesz representation theorem can
prove that there is a unique solution for u(x) for the integral and hence the
differential form. In addition, if f(x) is smooth, it also ensures that u(x) is
smooth.

Discretization
Once the integral or weak form has been set up, the next step is the
discretization of the weak form. The integral form needs to be solved
numerically and hence the integration is converted to a summation that can be
calculated numerically. In addition, one of the primary goals of discretization is
also to convert the integral form to a set of matrix equations that can be
solved using well-known theories of matrix algebra.
Fig 03: Meshing of gears in contact

As shown in Fig. 03, the domain is divided into small pieces known as
“elements” and the corner point of each element is known as a “node”. The
unknown functional u(x) are calculated at the nodal points. Interpolation
functions are defined for each element to interpolate, for values inside the
element, using nodal values. These interpolation functions are also often
referred to as shape or ansatz functions. Thus the unknown functional u(x)
can be reduced to

where nen is the number of nodes in the element, Ni and ui are the
interpolation function and unknowns associated with node i, respectively.
Similarly, interpolation can be used for the other functions v(x) and f(x)
present in the weak form, so that the weak form can be rewritten as

The summation schemes can be transformed into matrix products and can be
rewritten as

The weak form can now be reduced to a matrix form [K]{u} = {f}

Note above that the earlier trial function v(x) that had been multiplied does not
exist anymore in the resulting matrix equation. Also here [K] is known as the
stiffness matrix, {u} is the vector of nodal unknowns, and {R} is the residual
vector. Further on, using numerical integration schemes, like Gauss or
Newton-Cotes quadrature, the integrations in the weak form that forms the
tangent stiffness and residual vector are also handled easily.

A lot of mathematics is involved in the decision of choosing interpolation

functions, which requires knowledge of functional spaces (such as Hilbert and
Sobolev). For more details in this regard, the references listed in the article
“How Can I Learn Finite Element Analysis?” are recommended.

Solvers
Once the matrix equations have been established, the equations are passed
on to a solver to solve the system of equations. Depending on the type of
problem, direct or iterative solvers are generally used. A more detailed
overview of the solvers and how they work, as well as tips on how to choose
between them, are available in the blog article “How to Choose Solvers: Direct
or Iterative?“

Finite element analysis of a connecting rod carried out in the web browser with SimScale
TYPES OF FEM Different Types of Finite Element Method
As discussed earlier, traditional FEM technology has demonstrated
shortcomings in modeling problems related to fluid mechanics and wave
propagation. Several improvements have been made recently to improve the
solution process and extend the applicability of finite element analysis to a
wide range of problems. Some of the important ones still being used include:
Extended Finite Element Method (XFEM)
Bubnov-Galerkin method requires continuity of displacement across elements.
Although problems like contact, fracture, and damage involve discontinuities
and jumps that cannot be directly handled by the finite element method. To
overcome this shortcoming, XFEM was born in the 1990’s. XFEM works
through the expansion of the shape functions with Heaviside step functions.
Extra degrees of freedom are assigned to the nodes around the point of
discontinuity so that the jumps can be considered.

Generalized Finite Element Method (GFEM)

GFEM was introduced around the same time as XFEM in the 90’s. It
combines the features of the traditional FEM and meshless methods. Shape
functions are primarily defined by the global coordinates and further multiplied
by partition-of-unity to create local elemental shape functions. One of the
advantages of GFEM is the prevention of re-meshing around singularities.

Mixed Finite Element Method

In several problems, like contact or incompressibility, constraints are imposed
using Lagrange multipliers. These extra degrees of freedom arising from
Lagrange multipliers are solved independently. The system of equations is
solved like a coupled system of equations.

hp-Finite Element Method

hp-FEM is a combination of automatic mesh refinement (h-refinement) and an
increase in the order of polynomial (p-refinement). This is not the same as
doing h- and p- refinements separately. When automatic hp-refinement is
used, and an element is divided into smaller elements (h-refinement), each
element can have different polynomial orders as well.
 Discontinuous Galerkin Finite Element Method (DG-FEM)
DG-FEM has shown significant promise for utilizing the idea of finite elements
to solve hyperbolic equations, where traditional finite element methods have
been weak. In addition, it has also shown improvements in bending and
incompressible problems which are typically observed in most material
processes. Here, additional constraints are added to the weak form that
includes a penalty parameter (to prevent interpenetration) and terms for other
equilibrium of stresses between the elements.

FEM Conclusion
We hope this article has covered the answers to your most important
questions regarding what is the finite element method. If you’d like to see it in
practice, SimScale offers the possibility to carry out finite element analyses in
the web browser. To discover all the features provided by the SimScale cloud-
based simulation platform, download this overview or watch the recording of
one of our webinars.
Materials for getting started with SimScale can be found in the blog article “9
Learning Resources to Get You Started with Engineering Simulation“.
Discover the benefits of cloud-based simulation by creating a free
account on the SimScale platform. No installation, special hardware or
credit card required.

Community Plan 14-Day Professional Trial

References
 Schnellback, Probleme der Variationsrechnung, Journal für die reine und Angewandte
Mathematik , v. 41, pp. 293-363 (1851)
 R. Courant, Variational methods for the solution of problems of equilibrium and vibrations,
Bulletin of American Mathematical Society, v. 49, pp. 1-23 (1943)
 M. J. Turner, R. M. Clough, H. C. Martin and L. J. Topp, Stiffness and deflection analysis of
complex structures, Journal of Aeronautical Science, v. 23, pp. 805-823 (1956)
 M. J. Turner, R. M. Clough, H. C. Martin and L. J. Topp, Stiffness and deflection analysis of
complex structures,” Journal of Aeronautical Science, v. 23, pp. 805-823 (1956)
 J. H. Argyris, Die matritzentheorie der Statik, Ingenieur-Archiv XXV, pp. 174-194 (1957)
 O. C. Zienkiewicz, The Finite Element Method in Structural and Continuum Mechanics,
McGraw-Hill, London (1971)
 I. Babuska and A. K. Aziz, Survey lectures on the mathematical foundations of the finite
element method, In The Mathematical Foundation of the Finite Element Method with
Applications to Partial Differential Equations, pp. 3-636 (1972)
 G. Strang and G. J. Fix, An analysis of the Finite Element Method, Prentice-Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey (1973)
 J. T. Oden, Finite elements: An introduction, in Handbook of Numerical Analysis II, Finite
element methods (Part I), North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 3-12 (1991)